HabitualLinestepper

TESTING PROTESTANTISM I think I'll start a regular series on testing the claims of Protestants and Protestantism. Rule #1 for Protestants: You can't refer to the Catholic Church at all. Your theology has to stand on its own. Your theology is being tested.

@JennyWakefiel12 Right here. Which verses do you reject?

My question was “How can someone be saved?” Romans always avoid answering this question, but it is the most important question for mankind. If they were there church, their sole purpose would be answering this question.

There’s nothing to study. You let Muslims in anywhere, you’re instantly a medieval, third world shit hole, never to recover. Class dismissed.

Read the responses

Just tried to call a local hotel, not a chain. After a long hold, someone in India answers. Tells me I need to call the hotel front desk. Gives me the number I just called. Our country can’t survive without this, you see.

“I promise we don’t worship Mary” comments incoming

@cedie_ii44635 @CombatJoe1010 @JennyWakefiel12 False dilemma Mary's soul magnifies the Lord

@CombatJoe1010 @JennyWakefiel12 Wait wait. So instead of the arc being about JESUS, instead of her being blessed because she’s carrying JESUS, instead of the Davidic line being about JESUS We should go to her?? That makes sense to yall?

If God’s Word is not the only infallible source of truth, and isn’t the highest authority to which all Christians must submit….then what is?

@JennyWakefiel12 @CombatJoe1010 It's not an assumption. The Bible LITERALLY says the word of God is not limited to the Bible

@CombatJoe1010 No. The problem is your assuming the written word is NOT all of God’s revealed word to us. How do you validate anything extrabiblical as coming from God? You are trusting in someone who says “trust me….its from God”. You cannot verify any of it outside of scripture.

@Moesby66 @fredgiblet I'm unsurprised that you reject facts that contradict your feelings. It's very common for women

@fredgiblet @HabitualLinest do you feel better to think that women are as depraved as you? No end to men’s lies is there?

1. Women are absolutely consuming porn, both in video and book format 2. One of the top "romance" books out right now is about bestiality 3. Remember the "romance" movie where the old woman died and went to "heaven" and was greeted by her one-time bad boy fling rather than her husband of 60 years? 4. A large % of "romance" movies involve hypergamy and monkey branching. Where the lead character finally discovers her boyfriend of several years "was never really the one" and "she always knew something was off". She only discovered this when the new exciting guy enters her life. 5. Women are keeping a "roster" of guys to sleep with so they will buy them things and give them the attention they crave 6. Instagram is an addiction for women

@Eskon123 @rickbrennanjr @MsCatholicJules @gavinortlund @WesleyLHuff It's ok for you to admit you don't understand

@HabitualLinest @rickbrennanjr @MsCatholicJules @gavinortlund @WesleyLHuff Weaksauce, you made no coherent argument whatsoever.

The Roman Catholic backlash to @gavinortlund and @WesleyLHuff has been instructive. Both men are irenic, careful, and respectful in how they address what they believe are errors in Roman Catholic doctrine. Yet both have drawn deeply personal attacks for their apologetic work. This raises an important question many Protestants are asking: why do thoughtful, respectful critiques of Roman Catholicism often provoke such a visceral response? The visceral reaction many Catholics have when Rome is challenged makes sense once we understand the Roman Catholic system. Rome is not merely one church among others in their theology. It is the visible institution possessing the fullness of the means of salvation, the sacramental economy, the authentic interpretation of Scripture and Tradition, and the Petrine office of universal authority. Therefore, to challenge Rome is not received as a mere doctrinal disagreement. Rather, it is received as an attack on the what they believe is the very structure by which Christ supposedly teaches, governs, absolves, and saves. In contrast, Protestants are less threatened by challenges to a particular church tradition because Protestantism, at its best, does not locate salvation in institutional submission. The Baptist does not need the Baptist church to be indefectible. The Presbyterian does not need every presbytery to be incapable of grave error. The Lutheran does not need Wittenberg to be the necessary center of visible unity. Protestants argue fiercely, but their assurance rests finally in Christ’s finished work received by faith, not in the claim that one visible hierarchy or institution uniquely dispenses the fullness of saving grace. That is the real issue: Rome’s authority claims make historical criticism an existential threat. Protestantism can admit that church history is messy because the visible Church is always in need of reform. Protestants can also recognize ambiguity in the historical record and draw reasoned conclusions that differ from others without collapsing the faith. Rome cannot do this so easily. If too much historical complexity is admitted, Rome’s claim to be the indefectible guardian and interpreter of the apostolic deposit begins to weaken. History must produce clear answers because Rome must show that she has always taught what she now requires believers to confess—whether baptismal regeneration, Eucharistic transubstantiation, or papal supremacy. If the historical record shows change, ambiguity, contradiction, or later accretion rather than apostolic continuity, the entire sacerdotal system is threatened. So when a Roman Catholic lashes out at a protestant theologian or historian who is making an argument that runs counter to the approved narrative, the issue is often deeper than the topic being debated. The Protestant is arguing about history or doctrine. The Catholic may feel that their whole edifice of certainty, grace, authority, and salvation is being pulled down. And in a sense, the Catholic is right to feel critical importance of the stakes. If Rome is wrong about herself, then she is not merely wrong about secondary matters. She is wrong about the very place she has assigned herself between Christ and the believer.

@Eskon123 @MsCatholicJules @rickbrennanjr @gavinortlund @WesleyLHuff Petros and Petra are the same word in Koine Greek.

@MsCatholicJules @rickbrennanjr @HabitualLinest @gavinortlund @WesleyLHuff Peter is Petros the statement the Church is build on Petra. And your text says the church at Jerusalem not Rome right? Why would Peter be called Cefas if they did not speak Aramaic at Rome?

The people who claim to be afraid of the police don't act like it at all

Punish the employers, end all public benefits, tax all remittances This can be an all day everyday occurrence They will go home when we turn off the money spigot

A Mom in Tulsa called 3 health systems last week asking the price of her son's tonsillectomy. Health system A: "We cannot quote you a price." Health system B: "Pricing depends on your insurance." Health system C: "Our financial counselor will reach out after the procedure." No other industry in America gets to operate this way. Imagine ordering at a restaurant and getting the bill six weeks after dinner.

"A stone does not reach its full potential until it is used for a church." - Rafael Morales (Catholic Architect)

@JoshuaLisec She complains about her husband from the multi-million dollar home he provides for her....

Instadivorce. Husband-shaming is uncomebackfromable. Not even once.

That water clarity is an engineering decision, and the math behind it is wilder than the video. Roman aqueducts ran on gravity alone. No pumps, no pressure systems. Engineers carved channels with a gradient so shallow it borders on absurd. The Pont du Gard in southern France drops 2.5 centimeters over 275 meters. That's roughly the thickness of a coin over the length of three football fields. They surveyed that accuracy with plumb lines and wooden leveling instruments. The clarity you're seeing is a direct product of flow velocity. Too steep and the water erodes the channel walls, picks up sediment, turns brown. Too flat and it stagnates. Roman engineers targeted a slope of about 20 centimeters per kilometer, which kept the water moving fast enough to stay fresh but slow enough to stay clear. Before the water reached the city, it passed through multi-chamber settling tanks where velocity dropped near zero. Suspended particles sank. Clean water flowed out the top into the next chamber. Repeat three or four times. Pliny specified the minimum slope in writing. Vitruvius published the exact mortar ratio for hydraulic cement: one part lime to two parts volcanic ash for underwater work. The pozzolana from Pozzuoli reacted with water to form a calcium-aluminum-silicate compound that actually gets stronger the longer it sits submerged. Modern concrete degrades in water. Roman concrete bonds with it. Scale the whole system and it gets harder to process. Eleven aqueducts fed Rome at its peak. Combined output: roughly 1 million cubic meters of water per day. That works out to about 250 gallons per person for a city of one million. Modern New York delivers about 125 gallons per person per day. Ancient Rome had access to double the per capita water supply of the largest city in the United States, running entirely on slope and stone. The Trevi Fountain in Rome is still fed by one of them. Two thousand years, same source, same gravity, same water.

Uhhhhhhh, wut?!?!?!?

@jrhatcher1 @tjsaenzenglish @rickbrennanjr @gavinortlund @WesleyLHuff And your view of baptism directly contradicts the view of baptism for a LARGE percentage of Protestants. You have zero unity on baptism

@HabitualLinest @tjsaenzenglish @rickbrennanjr @gavinortlund @WesleyLHuff My church believes that baptism is for the remission of sin as long as the one being baptized believes the Gospel. I could go further, but that is the basics of our belief. My main point again is that while there are differences among Protestants, there is a fundamental unity.

@tjsaenzenglish @rickbrennanjr @gavinortlund @WesleyLHuff I was Baptist for most of my life. We didn't even go to other Baptist churches.

@rickbrennanjr @HabitualLinest @gavinortlund @WesleyLHuff I was Protestant for decades, including Presbyterian, Church of Christ, Pentecostal, etc. The Church of Christers have even split among themselves, the one cuppers/no missionaries from the others. You may have gone to different churches, me too, but that doesn't make them united.